Retrieve custom events ranked by count over a chosen lookback window to identify which tracked actions occur most. Adjust limit and range to focus results.
Custom events (from agentlytics.track) ranked by count.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max rows. Default 10. | |
| range | No | Lookback window such as "24h", "7d" or "30d" (max 90d). Default "7d". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that results are ranked by count, but does not state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, or any rate limits or pagination behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence that precisely conveys the resource and ranking without any wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is adequate about what is returned. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral context, which leaves gaps even for a low-complexity operation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'limit' and 'range' fully documented including defaults and bounds. The description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the specific resource ('custom events from agentlytics.track') and how they are ordered ('ranked by count'). It implies a list operation but does not use an explicit verb, and sibling differentiation is only implicit against the other ranked analytics tools (top_sources, top_pages, etc.).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over siblings like get_overview, top_sources, or query_visits. The phrase 'from agentlytics.track' hints at custom events, but there are no explicit usage conditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.